fathers gathered out of the Law and the Prophets,* cannot be said to signify so much; yet in many types was the crucifixion of Christ represented, and by some prophecies foretold. This was the true and unremoveable "stumbling-block to the Jews," nor could they ever be brought to confess the Messias should die that death upon a tree to which the curse of the Law belonged † and yet we need no other oracles than such as are committed to those Jews, to prove that Christ was so to suffer. A clearer type can scarce be conceived of the Saviour of

the world, in whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed, than Isaac was: nor can God the Father, who gave his only-begotten Son, be better expressed than by that patriarch in his readiness to sacrifice his son, "his only son Isaac, whom he loved." (Gen. xxii. 2.) Now when that grand act of obedience was to be performed, we find Isaac walking to the mountain of Moriah with the wood on his shoulders, and saying, "Here is the wood, but where is the sacrifice?" while in the command of God, and the intention and resolution of Abraham, Isaac is the sacrifice, who bears the wood. And the Christ, who was to be the most perfect sacrifice, the person in whom all nations were perfectly to be blessed, could die no other death in which the wood was to be carried; and being to die upon the cross, was, by the formal custom used in that kind of death, certainly to carry it. Therefore Isaac bearing the wood, did signify Christ bearing the cross.+

When the fiery serpents bit the Israelites, and "much people died," Moses, by the command of God, " made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole; ard it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived." (Numb. xxi. 9.) Now if there were no expresser promise of the Messias, than the "Seed of the woman, which should bruise the serpent's head;" (Gen. iii. 15.) if he were to perform that promise by the virtue of his death; if no death could be so perfectly represented by the hanging on the pole, as that of crucifixion; then was that manifestly foretold which Christ himself informed Nicodemus, "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up." (John iii. 14.)‡

The paschal lamb did plainly typify that Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world; and the preparing of it did not only represent the cross,§ but the command or ordinance.

This custom is very considerable as to the explication of this type; and is to be therefore confirmed by the testimonies of the ancients, which are most express. Βαστάζειν τινὰ τῶν δαιμόνων χθονίων κακούργῳ μὲν ἰδόντι σταυρὸν αὐτῷ σημαίνει· ἔοικε γὰς σταυρὸς θανάτῳ, καὶ ὁ μέλλων προσηλοῦσθαι πρότερον αὐτὸν βαστάζει. Artemid. Oneirocr. l. ii. c. 61. Τῷ μὲν σώματι τῶν κολαζομένων ἕκαστος τῶν κακούργων ἐκφέρει τὸν αὐτοῦ Taug Plutarch. de sera Numinis Vindicta, c. 9. So these not long after our Saviour's death. And much before it, Plautus in Carbonario,

'Patibulum ferat per urbem, deinde affigatur Cruci.'

This is not only the observation of the Christians, but the Jews themselves have referred this type unto that custom: for upon Gen. xxii. 6. "And Abraham took the wood of the burnt-offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son," the lesser

The common phrase by which that death was expressed. In Crucem tolli:' Paul. 1. 5. Sentent. Tit. 22, 23. 25. As in the Chaldee ppt by origination Elevatio, by use is particularly Crucifixio.

§ Justin Martyr shews how the manner of the roasting the paschal lamb did represent the affixing of a man upon the cross, and thereby was a type of Christ : Τὸ κελευσθὲν πρόβατον ἐκεῖνο ὅλον γίνεσθαι, τοῦ πάθους τοῦ σταυροῦ, δι' οὗ πάσχειν ἔμελλεν ὁ Χριστὸς, σύμβολον ἦν· τὸ γὰς ὀπτώμενον πρός βατον, σχηματιζόμενον ὁμοίως τῷ σχήματι τοῦ σταυροῦ ὀπτᾶται. Εἷς γὰρ ὄρθιος ὀβέλισκος διαπερονᾶται ἀπὸ τῶν κατωτάτων μερῶν μέχρι τῆς κεφαλῆς, καὶ εἷς πάλιν κατὰ τὸ μετάφρενον, ᾧ προσαρτώνται καὶ αἱ χεῖρες τοῦ προβάτου. Dial. cum Tryphone, p. 259. To which Arnoldus Carnotensis alludeth: In veru

of the passover did foretell as much. For while it is said, "ye shall not break a bone thereof," (Exod. xii. 46.) it was thereby intimated, that the Saviour of the world should suffer that death to which the breaking of the bones belonged (and that, according to the constant custom, was the punishment of crucifixion), but only in that death should by the providence of God be so particularly preserved, as that not one bone of his should be touched. And thus the crucifixion of the Messias

in several types was represented.

Nor was it only thus prefigured and involved in the typical resemblances, but also clearly spoken by the prophets in their particular and express predictions. Nor shall we need the accession of any lost or additional prophetical expressions, which some of the ancients have made use of:† those which are still preserved even among the Jews, will yield this truth.

sufficient testimonies.

When God foretells by the prophet Zachary, what he should suffer from the sons of men, he says expressly, "They shall

Crucis boni odoris assatio excoquat carnalium sensuum cruditatem;' De Cana Domini, commonly attributed to St. Cyprian. Nor is the roasting of this lamb any far-fetched figure of the cross; for other roasting hath been thought a proper resemblance of it: where the body of the thing roasted hath limbs, as a lamb, there it bears the similitude of a proper cross, with an erect and transverse beam; where the roasted body is only of length and uniform, as a fish, there the resemblance is of a straight and simple Tavęóg. As it is represented by Hesychius: Σκόλοψιν ὡς ὄπτησιν· τὸ γὰρ παλαιὸν κακούργους ἀνεσκολό πιζον ὀξύνοντες ξύλον διὰ τῆς ῥάχεως καὶ τοῦ νώτου, καθάπερ τοὺς ὀπτωμένους ἰχθὺς ἐπὶ ὀβελίσκων. s. v. Σκόλοψιν.

Although, indeed, it must be confessed, that the crurifragium and the crucifixion were two several punishments, and that they ordinarily made the cross a lingering death: yet because the Law of Moses did not suffer the body of a man to hang upon a tree in the night, therefore the Romans, so far to comply with the Jews, did break the bones of those whom they crucified in Judea constantly; whereas in other countries they did it but occasionally.

+ As Barnabas cites one of the prophets whom we know not, Epist. c. 12. 'Oμows πάλιν περὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ ὁρίζει ἐν ἄλλῳ προφήτῃ λέγοντι, Καὶ πότε ταῦτα συντελεσθήσεται; καὶ λέγει Κύριος, Ὅταν ξύλον κλιθῇ καὶ ἀναστῇ, καὶ ὅταν ἐκ ξύλου αἷμα στάξη· which words are not to be found in any of the prophets. Thus Justin Martyr, to prove, or μsTÀ TÒ σταυρωθῆναι βασιλεύσει ὁ Χριστὸς, produceth a prophecy out of the 96th Psalm, in

these words: ὁ Κύριος ἐβασίλευσεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου. p. 298. And Tertullian, who advances all his conceptions: Age nunc, si legisti penes Prophetam in Psalmis, Dominus regnavit a ligno; exspecto quid intelligas, ne forte lignarium aliquem regem significari putetis, et non Christum qui exinde a passione Christi (lege crucis, for he himself hath it ligni, Adv. Marcion. I. iii. c. 19.) superata morte regnavit.' Adɛ. Jud. c. 10. And in the place cited against Marcion: Etsi enim mors ab Adam regnavit usque ad Christum, cur Christus non regnasse dicatur a ligno, ex quo crucis ligno mortuus, regnum mortis exclusit?' Thus they, and some after them, make use of those words, anò úλov, a ligne, which are not to be found either in the Greek or Latin translation, from whence they seem to produce them; nor is there any thing like them in the original, or any translation extant, nor the least mention or footstep of them in the Catena Gracorum Patrum. Justin Martyr, indeed, ac cused the Jews for rasing the words arò τοῦ ξύλου out of the text: Απὸ τοῦ ἐνενηκον στοῦ πέμπτου ψαλμοῦ τῶν διὰ Δαβὶδ λεχθέντων λόγων, λέξεις βραχείας ἀφείλοντο ταύτας, ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου· εἰρημένου γὰρ τοῦ λόγου, Εἴπατε ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, Ὁ Κύριος ἐβασίλευσεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου, ἀφῆκαν, Εἴπατε ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, Ὁ Κύριος CarineUser. p. 298. But, first, he doth not accuse them for rasing it out of the original Hebrew, for his discourse is only to shew that they abused the LXX. Secondly, though the Jews had rased it out of their own, it appeareth not how they should have gotten it out of the Bibles in the Christians' hands, in which those words are not to be found.

look upon me whom they have pierced;" (Zech. xii. 10.)* and therefore shews that he speaks of the Son of God, which was to be the Son of man, and by our nature liable to vulneration; and withal foretells the piercing of his body: which being added to that prediction in the Psalms, "They pierced my hands and my feet,"+ (Psal. xxii. 16.) clearly representeth and foretelleth to us the death upon the cross, to which the hands and feet of the person crucified were affixed with nails. And because these prophecies appeared so particular and clear, and were so properly applied by that disciple whom our Saviour loved, and to whom he made a singular application even upon the cross; therefore the Jews have used more than ordinary industry and artifice to elude these two predictions, but in

These words of Zachary are clear in

והביטו אלי את אשר דקרו,the original

although the LXX. have made another sense, ἐπιβλέψονται πρός με, ἀνθ' ὧν καταςXaro, by translating wave' av, eo quod; as also the Chaldee paraphrase

with the Arabic version; and the Syriac another yet, by rendering it per eum quem, as if they should look upon one, and pierce another: yet the plain construction of wx n, is nothing else but quem, relating to the person in the affix of the precedent, who, being the same with him who immediately before promiseth to pour upon man the Spirit of grace, must needs be God. Which that the Jews might avoid, they read it not

but rx, not on me, but on him, to distinguish him whom they were to pierce, from him who was to give the Spirit of grace. But this fraud is easily detected, because it is against the Hebrew copies, the Septuagint, and Chaldee paraphrase, the Syriac and Arabic translations. Nor can the Rabbins shift this place, because it was anciently by the Jews interpreted of the Messias, as themselves confess. So R. Solomon Jarchi upon the place,

Our masters רזל" פירשוהו על משיח בן יוסף :

have expounded this of the Messias the son of Joseph. That they interpreted it therefore of the Messias, is granted by them; that any Messias was to be the son of Joseph, is already denied and refuted: it remaineth therefore that the ancient Jews did interpret it of the true Messias, and that St. John did apply it to our Saviour according to the acknowledged exposition. And in the Bereshith Rabba, we are clearly taught thus much; for unto that question, Who art thou, O great mountain?" (Zech. iv. 7.) he answereth,

The great mountain is הגדול זה משיח בן דור

the Messias the Son of David. And he proves it from, "Grace, grace unto it."

because he giveth grace שהו נתן חן ותחנונים

and supplications; as it is written, Zech. xii. 10.

This translation seems something different from the Hebrew text as we now read it, an sicut leo, manus meas et pedes meos. But it was not always read as now it is. For R. Jacob the son of Chajim, in Massoreth Magna,

testifieth that he found או ordine אות האלף in some correct copies בקצת ספרים כרייקים ,read כרי but כארו,written in the text כתוב .כארי and therefore written in the margin

X

The same is testified by the Masorah on Numb. xxiv. 9. citing the words of this text, and adding 17. And Johannes Isaac Levita confirmeth it by his own experience, who had seen in an ancient copy in the text, and in the margin. It was anciently therefore without question written, as appeareth not only by the LXX. who translated it

pugav, foderunt; and Aquila, who rendered it xuvav, fœdarunt, (in the same sense with that of Virgil, En. iii. v. 241. 'Obscœnas pelagi ferro fœdare volucres.') and the old Syriac, which translateth it w transfixerunt; but also by the less, or marginal, Masorah, which noteth that the word is found written alike in two places; this and Isaiah xxxviii. 18. but in divers significations: wherefore being in Isaiah it manifestly signifieth sicut leo, it must not signify the same in this; and being the Jews themselves pretend to nothing else, it followeth that it be still read as it was, 18, and translated foderunt. From whence it also appeareth, that this was one of the eighteen places which were altered by the Scribes.

For the Masorah in several places confesseth, that eighteen places in the Scriptures have been altered by the Scribes; and when they come to reckon the places, they mention but sixteen; the other two without question are those concerning the crucifixion of the Messias, Psalm xxii. 16. and Zech. xii. 10. that of Zachary, a Jew confessed it to Mercerus and that of David, we shewed before to be the other.

:

For

vain. For these two prophets, David and Zachary, manifestly did foretell the particular punishment of crucifixion.

It was therefore sufficiently adumbrated by types, and promulgated by prophecies, that the promised Messias was to be crucified. And it is as certain, that our Jesus, the Christ whom we worship, and from whence we receive that honour to be named Christians, was really and truly crucified. (Matt. xxvi. 2.) It was first the wicked design of Judas, who betrayed him to that death: it was the malicious cry of the obdurate Jews, "Crucify him, crucify him." (John xix. 15.) He was actually condemned and delivered to that death by Pilate, "who gave sentence that it should be as they required:" (Luke xxiii. 24.) he was given into the hands of the soldiers, the instruments commonly used in inflicting that punishment,* who "led him away to crucify him." (Matt. xxvii. 31.) He underwent those previous pains which customarily antecede that suffering, as flagellation, and bearing of the cross :† for "Pilate, when he had scourged Jesus, delivered him to be crucified;" (Matt. xxvii. 26.) "and he, bearing his cross, went forth into Golgotha." (John xix. 17.) They carried him forth out of the city, as by custom in that kind of death they were wont to do; and there between two malefactors, usually by the Romans condemned to that punishment, they crucified him.§ And that he was truly fastened to the cross, appears by the satisfac

That the soldiers did execute the sentence of death given by the Roman magistrates in their provinces, and not only in the camp, is evident out of the historians of that nation.

+Sciendum est Romanis Pilatum legibus ministrasse, quibus sancitum est, ut qui crucifigitur prius flagellis verberetur.' S. Hieron. ad Matt. xxvii. 26. To which Lucian alludes in his own condemnation : Ἐμοὶ μὲν ἀνεσκολοπίσθαι δοκεῖ αὐτὸν, νὴ Δία, μαστιγωθέντα γε πρότερον. Lucian. in Piscatore, c. 2. Multi occisi, multi capti, alii verberati crucibus affixi.' Liv. 1. xxxiii. c. 36. And I. xxviii. Ad palum

This was observed both by the Jews and Romans, that their capital punishments were inflicted without their cities. And that particularly was observed in the punishment of crucifixion. Plautus ;

'Credo ego isthoc exemplo tibi esse eundum actutum extra portam,
Dispessis manibus, patibulum cum habebis.'-Mil. Glor. a. ii. s. iv. 6.

Tully; Cum Mamertini more atque in-
stituto suo crucem fixissent post urbem in
via Pompeia.' V. in Verr. c. 66.

Thieves and robbers were usually by the Romans punished with this death. Thus Casar used his pirates, τοὺς λῃστὰς ἅπαντας ἀνεσταύρωσε. Plut. in Vita, c. 2. 'Imperator provinciæ jussit latrones crucibus affigi. Petron. Sat. c. 111. La tronem istum, miserorum pignorum meorum peremptorem, cruci affigatis.' Apuleius de Aur. Asin. 1. iii. p. 133. ed. Elmenhorst. 1621. 'Latrocinium fecit

aliquis, quid ergo meruit? Ut suspenda. tur.' Sen. Epist. 7. Where suspendi is as much as crucifigi, and is so to be understood in all Latin authors which wrote before the days of Constantine. Famosos latrones, in his locis ubi grassati sunt, furca figendos, compluribus placuit.' Callist. 1. xxxviii. de pænis. Where furca figendos is put for crucifigendos; being so altered by Tribonianus, who, because Constantine had taken away the pu nishment, took also the name out of

the Law.